SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Department published the Preliminary Results on December 3, 2014.^[2] On March 13, 2015, the Department extended the deadline for issuing the final results by 60 days, until June 1, 2015.^[3] On January 9, 2015, Gangchang and Kangfa submitted a joint case brief.^[4] On January 21, 2015, ( printed page 32356) petitioner Monterey Mushrooms submitted a rebuttal brief.^[5]

Scope of the Order

The products covered by this antidumping order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153, and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.^[6]

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues which parties raised is attached to this notice as an appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building, as well as electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/​frn/​index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

Based on our review of the comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, and for the reasons explained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, we have revised the margin calculation for both Gangchang and Kangfa. The respective analysis memoranda for Gangchang and Kangfa contain further explanation of the margin calculations utilized in the final results.^[7]

Final Determination of No Shipments

In the Preliminary Results, we determined that Xiamen International Trade & Industrial Co., Ltd. (XITIC) and Zhangzhou Hongda Import & Export Trading Co., Ltd. (Zhangzhou Hongda) did not have any reviewable entries during the POR because both XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda submitted timely certifications of no shipments, entries, or sales of subject merchandise during the POR and we did not receive any information from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) indicating there were reviewable entries for XITIC or Zhangzhou Hongda during the POR. Consistent with the Department's assessment practice in non-market economy cases, we stated in the Preliminary Results that the Department would not rescind the review in these circumstances but, rather, would complete the review with respect to XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review.^[8] We did not receive any comments following our Preliminary Results with respect to this issue. As such, in these final results, we continue to determine that XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda had no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR.

Final Results of Review and Partial Rescission of Review

In our Preliminary Results, we found that 48 companies subject to this review did not establish their eligibility for a separate rate and that they were, thus, part of the PRC-wide entity. In these final results, we continue to determine that 47 of these companies are part of the PRC-wide entity.^[9] Because no party requested a review of the PRC-wide entity and the Department no longer considers the PRC-wide entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews, we did not conduct a review of the PRC-wide entity and the entity's rate is not subject to change. Finally, we note that one of the companies determined to be a part of the PRC-wide entity in our Preliminary Results, Dezhou Kaihang Agricultural Science Technology Co., Ltd. (Dezhou Kaihang), is a respondent in a new shipper review covering the period February 1, 2013 through February 28, 2014, the final results of which are being issued concurrent with these final results. Because the new shipper review encompasses the entire POR of the administrative review, Dezhou Kaihang's sole sale during the POR is covered by the new shipper review and, therefore there is no reviewable entry subject to this administrative review.^[10] Accordingly, we are rescinding this administrative review with respect to Dezhou Kaihang.

For the companies subject to this review that established their eligibility for a separate rate, the weighted average dumping margins for the final results of this review for the POR are as follows: ( printed page 32357)

Disclosure

The Department will disclose calculations performed for these final results to the parties within five days of the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Assessment Rates

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

For assessment purposes, for both Gangchang and Kangfa, we will instruct CBP to liquidate based upon a per-unit, importer-specific, assessment rate. This per-unit assessment rate is based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered quantity of those same sales.^[11] For the 47 companies identified above as being part of the PRC-wide entity, any entries will be assessed at the PRC-wide rate.

On October 24, 2011, the Department announced a refinement to its assessment practice in non-market economy cases.^[12] Pursuant to this refinement in practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate at the PRC-wide rate. In addition, if the Department determines that an exporter had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number ( i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.

As noted above, the Department determines that XITIC and Zhangzhou Hongda did not have any reviewable transactions during the POR. As a result, any suspended entries that entered under these exporters' case numbers will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this review; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters which are not under review in this segment of the proceeding but received a separate rate in a previous segment, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently-completed period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity ( i.e., 308.33 percent); ^[13] and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied the non-PRC exporter. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers

This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

We are issuing and publishing these results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

List of Topics Discussed in the Accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum

Summary

Background

Scope of the Order

Discussion of Issues

Comment 1 Land Rent

Comment 2 Well Water and Casing Soil

Comment 3 Labor Cost

Comment 4 Glass Jars and Metal Caps

Comment 5 Compost Offset

Comment 6 Surrogate Financial Ratios

Recommendation